Do you know with absolute certainty the definition of child rape? It's a lot more lenient than you think.

Originally Posted by RCW 9A.44.079

A.) A person is guilty of rape of a child in the third degree when the person has sexual intercourse with another who is at least fourteen years old but less than sixteen years old and not married to the perpetrator and the perpetrator is at least forty-eight months older than the victim.

So an 18 year old can get jiggy with a 14 year old, and it's cool as long as she consents.

Or a 19 year old can get down with a 15 year old, and it's no big deal.

If a parent believes the school is negligent in providing a safe environment for their child, they can sue the school district as a whole and the individual employees they deem complacent.

If the principal knew the kid had the incriminating pictures and he let the kid take off, he is complacent and de facto condoned the behaviour. A halfway decent attorney would have an easier time making the case for detaining a fleeing child then not.

Thanks, didn't know that. I am a going-to-be teacher in my last year of university, and we are generally told that our responsibilities begin and end with the bell.

Of course, if people can prove you were involved as a witness and didn't act to stop a crime in progress, things could get nifty, but how to prove that is another thing.

Originally Posted by Don Gwinn

Pilgrim, I don't know where you learned the #1 rule of teaching, but that's not the one I was taught. As a matter of fact, I don't think the rule that kids can do whatever they want as long as they don't violate the law with videobeamers has ever come up in my training.

Okay, then as a more experienced colleague, would you say that the principal could judge, from whatever material of evidence he had at hand, what the situation was, or how the promiscuitive foto material had been obtained? - Also, why the hell didn't he just confiscate the phone and leave the student alone? If the material was really illegal in nature, that alone would have sufficed.

Most teachers I know have a problem with a certain god complex. That one is like the textbook example. If 15-year-olds make you use your cool like that, change your job.

Originally Posted by Don Gwinn

It's impossible to tell from this video whether the principal was justified. We can't know whether the kid threatened violence verbally, for instance, or why he was trying to push his way past the principal toward the crowd of kids.

Exactly. Still, there are always better ways. Why not have the police or whomever come to your place, instead of having the kid go through the alley? Also, the incident must have happened somewhere else, because the principal is clearly already acquainted with the kid. Not sure if the kid has already been warned by him or tries to flee, though.

In any case, not only does this not justify violence, it is also highly unprofessional.

Of course, if people can prove you were involved as a witness and didn't act to stop a crime in progress, things could get nifty, but how to prove that is another thing.

In the course of the ensuing lawsuit, you would need to prove you were ignorant of the potential of the child possessing the offending images, which would be difficult to do as you attempted to detain the child in a non-contact manner yet let him go.

Thanks, didn't know that. I am a going-to-be teacher in my last year of university, and we are generally told that our responsibilities begin and end with the bell.

Of course, if people can prove you were involved as a witness and didn't act to stop a crime in progress, things could get nifty, but how to prove that is another thing.

Okay, then as a more experienced colleague, would you say that the principal could judge, from whatever material of evidence he had at hand, what the situation was, or how the promiscuitive foto material had been obtained? - Also, why the hell didn't he just confiscate the phone and leave the student alone? If the material was really illegal in nature, that alone would have sufficed.

Most teachers I know have a problem with a certain god complex. That one is like the textbook example. If 15-year-olds make you use your cool like that, change your job.

Exactly. Still, there are always better ways. Why not have the police or whomever come to your place, instead of having the kid go through the alley? Also, the incident must have happened somewhere else, because the principal is clearly already acquainted with the kid. Not sure if the kid has already been warned by him or tries to flee, though.

In any case, not only does this not justify violence, it is also highly unprofessional.

You know what? Just say you don't agree. Building complex situations, where you can justify calling the guy unprofessional, is silly.